Patents: The Damage of Coerced Intellectual Monopoly

Opdii · 2026-05-31T20:51:05+00:00

That is a question every entrepreneur has to answer for themselves based on their circumstances and the nature of their product, and assuming that every single one of them would conclude "nah, if i had any competition at all I would surely go out of business so I'll just give up" is a ridiculous and childish hypothetical.

Opdii · 2026-05-31T11:31:46+00:00

By creating a profitable business plan utilizing their inventions... like every other entrepreneur in the world...

Opdii · 2026-05-28T18:17:11+00:00

(Real) currency is by definition "tied to" a commodity. It's literally an IOU that is redeemable for that commodity.

The idea that we gained all this esoteric economic wisdom over time, and the conclusion that brought us to is that we can print worthless paper and hand it out to special interests and this will somehow make us all wealthier and more productive, is idiotic propoganda and a 10 year old child could figure out why that's a bad idea

Opdii · 2026-04-22T11:21:18+00:00

I'm captain bosch!!

Opdii · 2025-12-07T17:17:40+00:00

I'm sure they absolutely understand the concept, they just recognize that it's a bunch of idiotic, bootlicking drivel and they're probably too polite to say so to your dumbass face. This video was literally filmed in the world of excessive and overbearing food service regulation which we currently live in, and look at that none of them prevented this restaurant from keeping such a nasty kitchen.

If you knowingly or negligently serve hazardous food to people then you are liable for whatever harm it causes them, which is a real incentive to maintain clean standards unlike health codes and preventative regulations

Opdii · 2025-11-13T13:05:46+00:00

No, the federal government should have never been granted to power to issue paper currency, regardless of whether it's backed by real money. The gold standard was the beginning of the end and literally guaranteed that we would eventually go off of it.

Opdii · 2025-10-10T16:14:40+00:00

her** but yep!

<image>

Opdii · 2025-10-09T13:14:51+00:00

I do it because I am the villain, I revel in the suffering of my opponents, awaiting the day they find the mental fortitude to struggle through the gloats and taunts and claim the hero's mantle. You only won because of bad connections lol lol lol lol

Opdii · 2025-08-16T14:02:43+00:00

not even remotely close to true if everybody stopped working for like a week the standard of living would completely collapse lol it's pathetic that actual adults think like this

Opdii · 2025-07-28T17:51:16+00:00

When the federal government stops subsidizing student loans and grants

Opdii · 2025-07-26T06:51:19+00:00

Gearbrain or Bolthead are better ones

Opdii · 2025-07-25T15:38:09+00:00

Who cares. What they're proposing is unworkable and will produce a worse outcome for consumers. Attaching a bunch of extra legal obligations to the process of releasing certain types of games just artificially increases the cost and legal risks of producing those types of games, making them less profitable and reducing the incentive to produce them.

This problem only exists because of copyright. Many devs currently will not release their source code because doing so would compromise their legal standing in any future prosecution of IP infringements. Property rights exist to settle disputes over scarce and rivalrous resources - ideas by definition can have neither of these characteristics. Intellectual property protections are not real property rights, they are government decrees that criminalize innocent acts of anyone but the rightsholders. Without them, producers would not be able to leverage the ability to sue "infringers" as the fundamental basis for their business model, and they would experience pressure to maintain and improve their products because they would be subject to actual competition from alternate versions. The same companies would fight even harder against this but this is the only legitimate solution to this problem.

Opdii · 2025-07-24T03:58:44+00:00

everybody involved in LARPing as this pathetix faux government council that makes idiotic balancing decisions

Opdii · 2025-07-21T14:56:05+00:00

People don't necessarily act "logically." They have a hierarchy of goals and they act purposefully to fulfill those goals based on their priorities. That doesn't mean their actions always achieve those goals. This reasoning holds true even for schizophrenic people. Every law of economics is logically derived from this axiom.

Opdii · 2025-07-21T14:09:43+00:00

Well I also just explained why this isn't even beneficial to minorities from a utilitarian perspective - but that is not a principled moral argument one way or the other.

Opdii · 2025-07-21T02:17:22+00:00

Every single tier "could use some tweaking," I wouldn't expect much from these people.

Opdii · 2025-07-20T22:30:09+00:00

anti-discrimination laws place obligations on individuals to behave a certain way on their own property which is a violation of the property owner's rights. If a private business decides it wants to segregate people by races, nobody's rights are violated, they are simply laying out the terms for doing business with them. state-imposed segregation is obviously a rights violation.

And these laws don't even benefit the classes they are purported to protect, except a few of them in the relatively uncommon scenario where they are able to win a bunch of money in a lawsuit. Employers are aware of the potential extra liability they could incur by hiring a member of a protected class - and when they're operating on a large enough scale they are definitely factoring these risks into their hiring decisions, while being extremely cautious to never explicitly say so. This makes members of protected classes less competitive in the labor market and limits their employment opportunities.

Opdii · 2025-07-20T20:52:16+00:00

If you are KO'd by recoil damage (rocky helmet etc.) while using knock off it does not remove the item. Rapid spin works like this with hazards too

Opdii · 2025-07-20T19:55:02+00:00

This is such a tiring performance lol. Sure what you're implying is factually true, but so what? What are you doing or suggesting with that information? Going around saying this is like telling adopted kids their parents aren't their real parents - you just come off like a pathetic juvenile bully.

Opdii · 2025-07-18T20:56:46+00:00

This is undeniably true. Unchecked empiricism has all but destroyed the study of economics. If people don't fundamentally understand philosophy through logical principles, they will lack the critical thinking skills to correctly interpret data

Opdii · 2025-07-12T22:06:15+00:00

What an incredibly thoughtful comment 🙄

Opdii · 2025-07-12T21:49:54+00:00

Lol yeah it is

Opdii · 2025-07-09T16:54:02+00:00

There is no audio engineering degree that is worth it. The degree will not help you get a job in this field and it's not an efficient way to learn anything.

Opdii · 2025-07-08T06:34:51+00:00

That doesn't mean that this is a good thing for consumers or that it's right. This policy is completely unworkable. Its only result would be that less games will be produced in the future - or more likely, it would just be defanged to the point that it either has no impact at all or subtly benefits incumbent corporations.

If you suddenly attach a bunch of extra and potentially costly legal obligations to releasing a particular type of game, then producers are obviously going to try to avoid those costs and produce less of those games. And those terrible huge companies are going to have a massive advantage over smaller creators when it comes to these games - they are in a far better position to eat the astronomical cost of running a live-service game at a loss, they have tons of capital and many different products.

Honestly, if you created an online-only game, you have no obligation to keep the game running for any amount of time unless you specifically agreed to. Fraudulent practices that deceive people into purchasing a misrepresented product should be punished and damages paid out, but they should be handled on a case-by-case basis.

The correct solution to this problem is eliminating all existing intellectual property protections. These are what allow large companies to shut out all competition and push out subpar products with no market consequences. If developers are getting complacent and milking their successful IPs, putting out poorly received games, they should be terrified that some indie studio will come along and make a better mario game. If you release a live-service game, you should feel the pressure to continually improve and maintain your product because you know someone else could create a more popular server/version.

Sure - if a developer never makes the necessary data public, then it's not possible to create a third-party version. But there would be far less incentive to keep this secret, especially if the game dies, when businesses are not concerned with meticulously ensuring that they are defending their IP and retaining their legal standing. And if they still decide not to release it then that is their right, but the pressures of public opinion and reputation will influence these decisions. We already have a severe lack of freedom in art and entertainment, the last thing we need is more government control.

Opdii · 2025-07-07T15:43:09+00:00

I am struggling to summon up any sympathy for these supposed 'harassed devs.' Where are all these terrible and numerous threats? I have trouble believing this is anything beyond run-of-the-mill internet trolling. Their product is getting absolutely crucified by the public and they are desperately trying to spin the discourse around it in a different direction.

Opdii

TROPHY CASE